On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 10:35:18PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> We don't need to discard the
> existing, portable partitioning mechanisms in order to achieve this.
"portable"?
You are not referring to DOS-type partition tables, are you?
Nobody knows what they are.
DOS, Windows, Windows NT, OS/2, Solaris and Linux each interpret
things in a slightly different way.
It would be extremely desirable to throw them out and replace them
by something that is well-defined.
> The LVM superblock is exactly what you are after, isn't it? You
> place one of those on a DOS partition, and then ...
We are still not reaching each other.
Let me reiterate.
Stephen: There is no place to put an UUID.
Andries: Use a Linux-type partition table.
Stephen: That is not a DOS-type partition table.
Andries: Good riddance!
[We want to have a disk label / volume label / UUID / wwn
for disk and partitions. If we write some data on the disk
itself then either we must use a partitioning scheme that
has room for such things, e.g., a Linux-type partition table,
or we must use some "unused" sectors on the disk (terrible),
or we must write the information inside some partition
(that has this and possibly also other information) -
inconvenient: this is not the right "level" for such
information, and partitions are a scarce resource.]
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST